Setting their sights on the splash thrown up by Leviathan in chapters 3 and 41, many interpreters have argued that the conflict between chaos and order, as embodied in combat mythology, is a theme in the Book of Job. Although I agree that issues related to chaos and order are central to the book, the assumption that any discussion of chaos and order must be related to combat mythology does not stand up to scrutiny. Order and chaos, I maintain, are broader terms. I define them as “how the world ought to be,” and “how the world ought not to be,” respectively. Using these broader, and, I think, more accurate definitions, the Book of Job can be read as a long discussion about chaos and order, without requiring that we identify characters as forces embodying chaos or order who fight each other for control of the world, an interpretation which is an over-simplification of what is going on in the book. As “how the world ought/ought not to be,” order and chaos are container terms, capable of being filled in a number of different ways. That is to say, we cannot look at Leviathan (or Tiamat) and extrapolate characteristics of chaos that are applicable across the board. Rather, what constitutes chaos or order will depend on the particular circumstances and point of view of the person doing the labeling. In this thesis, I identify three pairs of concepts around which chaos and order are commonly conceived: singularity/multiplicity, stasis/change, and inside/outside. Taking these pairs one at a time, I examine how the various characters in the Book of Job describe order and chaos. What emerges is not a dictum as to what constitutes order or chaos, but a number of possible visions of how the world ought and ought not to be, none of which is definitive. At the end of the “conversation about chaos and order” that is the Book of Job, both God and Job make strong bids for their right to “make the world,” by deciding how it ought and ought not to be. In his speeches from the whirlwind, God identifies himself as the world’s creator, presenting an ordered world that is vastly different from what Job presumes order to be. Regardless of how Job’s response to God in 42:6 is understood—and it is interpreted in a great number of ways—in the epilogue Job can be seen to make his own bid for creator status, as he proceeds to inhabit a world that bears no similarity to the world God has just described. Job’s epilogue-world denies the ultimate reality of God’s whirlwind-world, but God’s whirlwind-world casts doubt upon the reality of Job’s epilogue-world. In this way, the book ends ambiguously; it curves back on itself, and the discussion about the nature of chaos and order continues, both within the book and beyond.

Although New Testament scholars generally acknowledge that "knowing" and "knowledge" play and important role in 2 Peter, little research has to date been done about the motif of knowing in 2 Peter. The aim of this study was to determine what the nature of the motif of knowing in 2 Peter is and what place it takes in his theology. The method that is used is exegetical, and this is done in accordance with the grammatico-historical model within the reformational tradition. The emphasis is especially on the special canonics (Introduction) of the epistle, the analysis of the thought structure, and the definition of the meanings for which words are used. In the analysis of the thought structure the method developed by Coetzee (1988:19-37) is followed to a large extent. The definition of meanings is done mainly in accordance with the method of componential analysis as proposed by Louw and Nida (1972:84-87; 1988i:vi-xx). The motif of knowing occurs in 2 Peter as a clearly repeated and meaningful semantic unit. Although this is not always done in the same way, the motif has a central place in practically every thought unit in the epistle. In the introduction of the letter (1:1-2) the motif of knowing is found in the truths of faith which the readers have accepted, as well as deep knowledge of God and Jesus Christ. In 1:3-11 Peter proposes a summary of his doctrine to his readers, encouraging them to apply these truths with insight and understanding. The ability to understand especially consists in comprehending the implications of a covenantal relationship with God. In the purpose of the letter (1:12-15; 3:1-2) the motif of knowing has a central place. Peter writes the epistle so that his readers will be able, after his death, to evoke from memory the knowledge (of his doctrine) of which they already dispose. The doctrine consists of information made known to them by the apostles about the powerful coming of Christ. The information is based in God's revelation in the glorification of Christ and in the Old Testament prophecies (1:16-21). In 2:1- 3:13, where Peter deals with the false teachers and the mockers, the motif of knowing still plays an important role. In chapter 2 he warns that false teachers will come who, as a result of a lack of insight will propagate licentiousness. He offers the consolation, however, that the Lord remembers to judge false teachers and to save. the believers. He also warns them against, in spite of their knowledge of Christ, returning to their old convictions. When the false preachers mockingly question both God's involvement in history and his judgment, the readers should not forget the know ledge which they have received about God's judgment and his time schedule. They should maintain the right perspective on God's grace and in joy wait upon his advent. Through this epistle the apostle equips his readers with the necessary knowledge to keep them strong against the inevitable onslaughts of the false teachers. / Proefskrif (ThD)--PU vir CHO, 1994

Although New Testament scholars generally acknowledge that "knowing" and "knowledge" play and important role in 2 Peter, little research has to date been done about the motif of knowing in 2 Peter. The aim of this study was to determine what the nature of the motif of knowing in 2 Peter is and what place it takes in his theology. The method that is used is exegetical, and this is done in accordance with the grammatico-historical model within the reformational tradition. The emphasis is especially on the special canonics (Introduction) of the epistle, the analysis of the thought structure, and the definition of the meanings for which words are used. In the analysis of the thought structure the method developed by Coetzee (1988:19-37) is followed to a large extent. The definition of meanings is done mainly in accordance with the method of componential analysis as proposed by Louw and Nida (1972:84-87; 1988i:vi-xx). The motif of knowing occurs in 2 Peter as a clearly repeated and meaningful semantic unit. Although this is not always done in the same way, the motif has a central place in practically every thought unit in the epistle. In the introduction of the letter (1:1-2) the motif of knowing is found in the truths of faith which the readers have accepted, as well as deep knowledge of God and Jesus Christ. In 1:3-11 Peter proposes a summary of his doctrine to his readers, encouraging them to apply these truths with insight and understanding. The ability to understand especially consists in comprehending the implications of a covenantal relationship with God. In the purpose of the letter (1:12-15; 3:1-2) the motif of knowing has a central place. Peter writes the epistle so that his readers will be able, after his death, to evoke from memory the knowledge (of his doctrine) of which they already dispose. The doctrine consists of information made known to them by the apostles about the powerful coming of Christ. The information is based in God's revelation in the glorification of Christ and in the Old Testament prophecies (1:16-21). In 2:1- 3:13, where Peter deals with the false teachers and the mockers, the motif of knowing still plays an important role. In chapter 2 he warns that false teachers will come who, as a result of a lack of insight will propagate licentiousness. He offers the consolation, however, that the Lord remembers to judge false teachers and to save. the believers. He also warns them against, in spite of their knowledge of Christ, returning to their old convictions. When the false preachers mockingly question both God's involvement in history and his judgment, the readers should not forget the know ledge which they have received about God's judgment and his time schedule. They should maintain the right perspective on God's grace and in joy wait upon his advent. Through this epistle the apostle equips his readers with the necessary knowledge to keep them strong against the inevitable onslaughts of the false teachers. / Proefskrif (ThD)--PU vir CHO, 1994

Postmodernism in Biblical Studies is characterised by proliferation of methodological and ideological interpretive perspectives, emphasis upon the ethics of interpretation and awareness of the role of interpretive communities. Following Stephen E. Fowl, the underlying motives of interpreters can be understood when approaches are analysed in terms of interpretive interests. The work of David J. A. Clines, J. Cheryl Exum and Stephen D. Moore reveals a strong de-confessional motive and a desire to exclude confessional concerns from academic interpretation. This position is ideologically driven and, in terms of liberal academic values, self-contradictory. The difficulties posed for Christian interpretation by the postmodern context are evident in the narrative criticism of Mark Allan Powell and R. Alan Culpepper, where unresolved conflict of theological, methodological and political interests threatens the coherence of the approach. Recent work by Powell addresses postmodern concerns, but fails adequately to engage theoretical and theological issues. A postmodern understanding of the Bible as Christian scripture which affirms both the validity and legitimacy of multiple interpretive perspectives and a pneumatological understanding of the Bible as the Word of God can be framed using the work of Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Stephen E. Fowl, Roman Jakobson and Daniel Patte. Socio-pragmatic objections to the legitimacy and validity of Christian interpretation beyond the faith community can be resisted by asserting a dialogical relationship between the Bible, the church and the wider academic community, and by following Francis Watson’s argument that the church’s discourse is derived from that of the wider society in which it exists. Christian interpretation will seek to engage constructively with other interpretive approaches. A Christian ethics of interpretation characterised by openness, humility, repentance and forgiveness offers a positive contribution to the culture of postmodern academic interpretation. Jesus’ encounter with the Syrophoenician woman in Mark 7 offers a paradigm for such interpretive practice.

This thesis is an enquiry into the problem of Barth’s unnatural exegesis. Previous attempts to account for the distinctiveness or strangeness of Barth’s exegesis have emphasised its theological character or its context in Church dogmatic tradition. This thesis judges this approach inadequate; in place of theological or dogmatic principles, this thesis searches for a basic hermeneutical principle which will render Barth’s exegesis intelligible and constructive. It is argued that this basic hermeneutical principle is that human subjectivity is predetermined by trans-individual structures of sin, self-deception and self-interest. This means that apparently impartial or spontaneous perceptions or judgements are predetermined by deep structures of sin concealed from our awareness. Barth’s theology is intended to expound what it means to speak of salvation through Christ in view of this trans-individual, trans-subjective nature of sin. Barth’s basic hermeneutical principle is constructively compared with R.Niebuhr’s concept of corporate self-deception, and with the thought of H.-G.Gadamer, who recognised that human subjectivity is predetermined by structures which transcend immediate awareness. In consequence, Barth held that apparently impartial or critical interpretations of Scripture serve to reinforce hidden structures of culturally ingrained forms of sinful self-interest. This is illustrated by means of a case study of Christ and Adam which represents Barth’s mature interpretation of Romans 5. It is demonstrated that Barth’s concern was with how interpretations of Romans 5 were covertly determined by the corporate self-deception of the West in the context of the Cold War and western anti-communism. Finally, it is argued that Barth’s theology and scriptural interpretation were closely grounded in his early political involvement and in his reaction to the outbreak of the First World War.

This thesis seeks to understand the rationale for membership in the Zion community envisaged by Isaiah 56-66. Previous scholarship has produced no holistic consideration for the use of the Abrahamic and Sinaitic covenants in the depiction of Zion's establishment. Part One of this thesis investigates the Zion community and its membership rationale, Abrahamic and Sinaitic covenantal roots, and Zion's establishment as Yahweh's community in the Core (Is. 60:1-62:12). Part Two shows how the rationale is applied to membership, i.e., to both inclusions and exclusions in the Framework sections (Is. 56-57; 65-66). Select exegesis of the Core shows the establishment of the Zion community (Ch. 1), then allusions in the Core to the earlier Abrahamic and Sinaitic covenants are used to compare the establishment of Zion with that of Abraham and Israel respectively (Chs. 2-3). Finally exegesis of the Framework sections demonstrates application of the rationale for inclusions in and exclusions from the community (Chs. 4-6). The covenantal nature of Zion's establishment is the key to her membership; its granting is seen in the promise of inclusions and its withdrawal in the threats of exclusions. Allegiance to Yahweh and holiness constitute the rationale for membership.

No description available.

The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the meaning and function of an apparently paradoxical statement encountered in the first letter of John. The method chosen for this investigation is an exegetical study of two passages namely 1Jn 1:6-10 and 3:6-10, which are supposed to be in juxtaposition. The argument, reduced to its bare minimum, will move as follows. Firstly, the first chapter sets the context for this study by addressing the issue of sin and its parameters in contemporary Jewish literature. Jewish writers of the time were much occupied with such themes as sin, sinfulness and sinlessness, need of cleansing, forgiveness, the reward of the righteous and punishment of the wicked. The Jewish world of thought of the time provides us with the ideological framework in which John is to be better understood. We are to witness the coexistence of apparently contradictory modes of thought concerning eschatology and by extension anthropology; for instance, statements supporting the exercise of free will on man's part and God's predestination or references to the idea of demonic powers being accountable for sin and man's own responsibility for sin, 'like those of a railway, run side by side, crisscross, or overlap in various ways', even in the same piece of work. Bearing in mind the result of the study of this background, chapter two undertakes an examination of the history of the community whose products the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles were. According to our findings, the Johannine community never became a sect alienated from the rest of Christianity, in spite of the presence of sectarian traits such as perfectionist ideas and ethical rigorism, the exaggeration of which led finally to an inner schism. Next, chapter three investigates the identity of those in combat to 1John, the so-called opponents of John, concluding that having being former members of the Johannine community, they misinterpreted the Johannine tradition conveyed by the Fourth Gospel, drawing radical conclusions about their sinlessness/perfection from its realised eschatology.

This thesis critically investigates the relationship between the Jewish majority and the Gentile minority in the church which gave rise to Matthew’s Gospel. That is, the investigation is one of ethnic divisions in one specific church. The central interest in this research is to examine the community life of Matthew’s church in order to discover whether there was any racial discrimination, tension, and conflict between the two ethnic groups which was exacerbated by quite different cultural backgrounds. In order to examine social division, it was necessary to study the background of the author and his community in relation to ethnicity, the requirements for entry into the Matthean community, their new group identity markers, and to analyse the community rules and leadership of Matthew. The research is done principally from a study of the text of Matthew’s Gospel and viewed from an ethnic perspective in evaluating any element relating to ethnicity. As the result of this research project, this thesis argues that Matthew accepted non-Jews also into his Christian-Jewish community regardless of ethnic origins and formed a new kinsfolk of God, but his community rules did not provide any room to accommodate the culture of the Gentile minority. This cultural intolerance caused division, tension, conflict, and finally church schism in the aftermath of the Matthean leadership. It is therefore, advisable for the present and future leadership in both Christian mission and in political administration to learn from Matthew’s failure to understand the power of culture and his lack of concern for the minority’s interest. The final argument of this thesis is to choose the alternatives of giving equal rights and privileges to both minorities and majorities, or granting devolution; whichever is preferred, all our aim should be to heal our wounded world and keep the Church catholic healthy and alive to her mission.

Detailed analysis of a number of passages in 32-37 establishes: (1) that Elihu does not present a solution to the problem of the suffering of the innocent: his view of suffering as punishment for actual sin and intended to communicate to man the necessity of repentance, is not an enunciation of a distinctive conception of divine pedagogy or discipline, but represents essentially the same position as that of the three friends; (2) that neither his name nor his more extensive genealogy is significative of a spectral mediatorial role; it is probable that they merely fulfil the interpolator's purpose in symbolising the exalted spiritual status of Elihu and thereby legitimising the belated appearance of a hitherto unacknowledged participant in the debate; (3) that there is no basis for the conception of Elihu as a mediator between God and man; on the contrary, it is evident that he intervenes on behalf of God and against Job; his speeches are principally a polemic against the Divine speeches, to be understood, not as providing a transition to the theophany, but as rendering the appearance of God altogether unnecessary. In conclusion, it is suggested that a diachronic approach has continuing value in application not only to the book of Job, but to the Old Testament as a whole. A synchronic approach is in danger of assuming an intrinsic unity which in actuality does not exist. In its final form, Job is an amalgam that, far from possessing a theological or a literary, even a dramatic, unity, contains a multiplicity of voices and traditions, of which Elihu is one. To see the book otherwise is to neutralise the dynamic quality or message which has made it so enduring.